• From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:13:54 -0500

On Jan 17, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Simon St.Laurent wrote:

> Robert Koberg wrote:
>> On Jan 17, 2009, at 10:45 AM, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>>> I worry that the example is way too simple, which makes the  
>>> consequences seem less consequential.
>>>
>>> However, as a way of introducing the concept to people who can't  
>>> imagine it, it's definitely a good thing.
>> In addition, I think authentication and authorization would come  
>> into play...
>
> For some applications, yes.  For a lot of others, no.

Either way, it is a level of authentication/authorization

best,
-Rob

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Meaning of "Design for the unanticipated user"
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Meaning of "Design for the unanticipated user"
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: Meaning of "Design for the unanticipated user"
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Meaning of "Design for the unanticipated user"
    • From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>
  • Re: Meaning of "Design for the unanticipated user"
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>